The K-MAX is able to carry up to 3.5 tons of supplies and munitions up to 250 miles, and has the ability to auto drop cargo in varying environments. During a "brown out" simulated dust storm -- aimed at replicating Afghanistan's harsh work environment -- cargo was still able to be delivered, according to test personnel.

The Marine Corps and Navy wanted the K-MAX to surpass 6,000 pounds of cargo drops per day for five days, with one mission successfully dropping 3,500 pounds.

And there I was on the other side of the world, just doing what I was told, just like every other eighteen, nineteen, and twenty-year old naïve kid.

Throughout my entire tour in Helmand, I only remember kids like me, they all were young and naïve! Some were so blinded by patriotism, they didn't care why they were there, they were American and they would fight for their country. I mean, come on! Even I, a naïve country boy could see that this third world country had nothing to do with our freedom. Did fighting terrorism mean killing thousands of innocent people? I didn't know the answer, but what I did know was that I wanted to get my ass out of there and back to that little country town where at least some things made sense.

I then put my Nintendo controller away, and headed for the NEX. My mind was a blur of memories of communication problems and flickering CRTs. The war stories I could tell you would make your hair curl.

jso2897:Why would we want to put meat inside of warplanes any more? It's expensive and reduces efficiency.

Because electronics just don't have the ability to adapt, improvise and overcome. No we need meat brains, just the brains mind you not the actual bodies, to control our drones. In the future signing up for the Air Force are Nave will mean you are agreeing to have your brain ripped out of your body and implanted into an AKV.

Tyler Fitzgerald: You know what I need? I need a drink. There's some ice and stuff back there. Why don't you make us all some old fashioneds?Ding Bell: "Old Fashions"? Do you think you oughta drink while you're flying?Tyler Fitzgerald: Well stop kidding, will ya, and make us some drinks! You just press the button back there marked "booze". It's the only way to fly!

/The stunt pilot that did that flying was Frank Tallman./On Saturday 15 April 1978, Tallman was making a routine ferry flight in a twin engine Piper Aztec from Santa Monica Airport, California, to Phoenix, Arizona under visual flight rules when he continued the flight into deteriorating weather, a lowering ceiling and rain. He struck the side of Santiago Peak in the Santa Ana Mountains near Trabuco Canyon at cruise altitude, dying in the ensuing crash.

meanmutton:lymond01: Recalling, once again, the original Star Trek episode where two countries fight with computer simulations to preserve their infrastructure (roads, buildings, libraries, schools, etc). So humans get a warning their area has been hit, then all affected walk into an incinerator.

SPOILER

Kirk, at the end, blows up one of their computers. The leader says, now the other side will think we are really attacking! There will be destruction, mayhem, horror!

To which Kirk replies, then you will know war and knowing war, you may choose to end it.

And this is where we are heading -- we are preserving the US soldiers but using drones means it doesn't cost us anything to kill. At least when we put our own people in harm's way, we might consider not fighting at all. Now we can accidentally obliterate children with impunity.

Slaves2Darkness:jso2897: Why would we want to put meat inside of warplanes any more? It's expensive and reduces efficiency.

Because electronics just don't have the ability to adapt, improvise and overcome. No we need meat brains, just the brains mind you not the actual bodies, to control our drones. In the future signing up for the Air Force are Nave will mean you are agreeing to have your brain ripped out of your body and implanted into an AKV.

And this is why I refuse to call them drones: because they aren't autonomous. There are still pilots making all the decisions, they just aren't sitting in the aircraft. The electronics aren't doing anything beyond following pilot commands.

What I would love to see is some of this drone technology in the hands of the Coast Guard. Someone swept overboard? Pleasure craft lost at sea? Deploy a set of high-speed drones that fly programmed search patterns that can locate them within a matter of minutes.

meanmutton:lymond01: Recalling, once again, the original Star Trek episode where two countries fight with computer simulations to preserve their infrastructure (roads, buildings, libraries, schools, etc). So humans get a warning their area has been hit, then all affected walk into an incinerator.

SPOILER

Kirk, at the end, blows up one of their computers. The leader says, now the other side will think we are really attacking! There will be destruction, mayhem, horror!

To which Kirk replies, then you will know war and knowing war, you may choose to end it.

And this is where we are heading -- we are preserving the US soldiers but using drones means it doesn't cost us anything to kill. At least when we put our own people in harm's way, we might consider not fighting at all. Now we can accidentally obliterate children with impunity.

Drones dramatically reduce civilian casualties.

If that were true, we wouldn't have re-defined "terrorist" to include "all adults between 15 and 60", now, would we?

Drones have their uses, but have not yet supplanted the Mark One Eyeball.

Squeebee:What I would love to see is some of this drone technology in the hands of the Coast Guard. Someone swept overboard? Pleasure craft lost at sea? Deploy a set of high-speed drones that fly programmed search patterns that can locate them within a matter of minutes.

Mimic_Octopus:meanmutton: lymond01: Recalling, once again, the original Star Trek episode where two countries fight with computer simulations to preserve their infrastructure (roads, buildings, libraries, schools, etc). So humans get a warning their area has been hit, then all affected walk into an incinerator.

SPOILER

Kirk, at the end, blows up one of their computers. The leader says, now the other side will think we are really attacking! There will be destruction, mayhem, horror!

To which Kirk replies, then you will know war and knowing war, you may choose to end it.

And this is where we are heading -- we are preserving the US soldiers but using drones means it doesn't cost us anything to kill. At least when we put our own people in harm's way, we might consider not fighting at all. Now we can accidentally obliterate children with impunity.

T-Servo:DarkSoulNoHope: He says most Navy drones now are operated by contractors overseen by military personnel.

Ok, this is farking creepy.

[www.teamjimmyjoe.com image 500x461]

It makes sense. The US has a clear advantage in contracting out to basement-dwelling drones, all with superior piloting and sharpshooting skills to anything the US military could produce.

It makes more sense to put them in military uniforms and have them recite their oath and be subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Not only will contractors be paid more than anything the US Military personnel will be paid (that should be fixed too, military should be paid the same of what we're paying contractors if these "armchair warriors" in the Congress and Senate want to fight wars with them) costing more than using military personnel, but the contracting company always sets it up so the employee(s) and company has a contract that says they can't be held legally responsible for their actions. That's why Blackwater is still around, consistently changing it's name to hide from lawsuits. I rather have the military subject to international law controlling these aircraft than some kid in a basement thinking he'll get extra points for blowing up a funeral or wedding.

Cuyose:Fizpez: PunGent: On a serious note, any Navy guys want to explain why the went with helicopter drones, rather than fixed wing?

For tending sonar buoys?

My guess is anything the Navy would be tracking and attacking can't outrun even a helicopter so why have something that needs to fly orbits around a target instead of something that can just hold station and fire away.

And the logistics and trust invovled with landing something unmanned on a cleared helipad on the back of a frigate vs. trying to catch a arrestor cable coming in at 100kts with a billion dollars of assets on a carrier deck.

That is basically what I was thinking. The Navy likes helicopters because they don't have to have a carrier deck (which ruins their combat ships).

However, that being said... my hobby level drones can land themselves on tarmac no problems. The moving deck of a ship... yeah, probably not so easy. BUT, a little re-thinking would get you a robotic arm on a long track (the length of the ship) which is keyed to a very accurate transponder in the vehicle. You "catch" it on the fly (using an electro-magnet). If you miss, no biggy, just fly over again. If you catch, you cut the drone power and use the robotic arm to bring it down to the hanger level. You can launch them the same way. Keep in mind, most drones have absolutely absurd power to weight ratios.

Believe it or not, this system is actually under development by a bunch of geeky college kids. The original idea was mine, but the actual implementation is far far beyond my meager skills. I seriously doubt the military will ever be interested. But our "future product" might include a car with a scout drone built in.

DarkSoulNoHope:T-Servo: DarkSoulNoHope: He says most Navy drones now are operated by contractors overseen by military personnel.

Ok, this is farking creepy.

[www.teamjimmyjoe.com image 500x461]

It makes sense. The US has a clear advantage in contracting out to basement-dwelling drones, all with superior piloting and sharpshooting skills to anything the US military could produce.

It makes more sense to put them in military uniforms and have them recite their oath and be subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Not only will contractors be paid more than anything the US Military personnel will be paid (that should be fixed too, military should be paid the same of what we're paying contractors if these "armchair warriors" in the Congress and Senate want to fight wars with them) costing more than using military personnel, but the contracting company always sets it up so the employee(s) and company has a contract that says they can't be held legally responsible for their actions. That's why Blackwater is still around, consistently changing it's name to hide from lawsuits. I rather have the military subject to international law controlling these aircraft than some kid in a basement thinking he'll get extra points for blowing up a funeral or wedding.

I was being sarcastic. No have no clue the depths of my hatred for Blackwater, Halliburton, and other war profiteers. Lockheed Martin, too.

T-Servo:DarkSoulNoHope: T-Servo: DarkSoulNoHope: He says most Navy drones now are operated by contractors overseen by military personnel.

Ok, this is farking creepy.

[www.teamjimmyjoe.com image 500x461]

It makes sense. The US has a clear advantage in contracting out to basement-dwelling drones, all with superior piloting and sharpshooting skills to anything the US military could produce.

It makes more sense to put them in military uniforms and have them recite their oath and be subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Not only will contractors be paid more than anything the US Military personnel will be paid (that should be fixed too, military should be paid the same of what we're paying contractors if these "armchair warriors" in the Congress and Senate want to fight wars with them) costing more than using military personnel, but the contracting company always sets it up so the employee(s) and company has a contract that says they can't be held legally responsible for their actions. That's why Blackwater is still around, consistently changing it's name to hide from lawsuits. I rather have the military subject to international law controlling these aircraft than some kid in a basement thinking he'll get extra points for blowing up a funeral or wedding.

I was being sarcastic. No have no clue the depths of my hatred for Blackwater, Halliburton, and other war profiteers. Lockheed Martin, too.

Sorry, my sarcasm detector is broken today due to another mindless job interview. Someday I'll find a fulfilling job, once my name is picked out of a hat, but for now working on my sarcasm detector.